D&D 5E How much do you value your Con score?

[CapnZapp]

Interestingly, someone did a poll before EnWorld lost the data and it seemed as if the mean score for character's currently being played was about 14.

Yep, that was me.

The results were a bell curve, saying that (very roughly) 10% of the characters we play have a Constitution of less than 12 (so no positive CON modifier) and (very roughly) 10% of the characters we play have a Constitution of more than 17 (so CON +4 or better). The majority of characters have a Con bonus of +1, 2 or 3 with +2 being the most common bonus.

All IIRC

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

...I do not care for the way you always take the criticism against the game so personally.

I'm not taking anything personally - though you seem to be trying to make things personal by the way you choose to tell me things that I can "stuff" - I'm just trying to point out to you that your criticisms are undermined by your hyperbolic phrasing.

If something isn't genuinely broken, meaning it just flat out doesn't work, and you call it broken because you don't like it or because it doesn't work given how you specifically play the game, instead of sounding like a well-reasoned criticism, it comes off as nonsense at best and outright trolling at worst.

But hey, if you don't want to phrase your criticisms in ways that make them seem more reasonable, that's up to you.

I will certainly not allow you to redirect the discussion to be about you and your characters.

That's not a thing I ever attempted to do.

Repeat after me: it is still fine to play the game even if you admit not everything about is perfect. So there's nothing wrong with agreeing with me once in a while (even if that while does not have to be today). Thank you and have a pleasant afternoon.

Remember that other thread in which I listed some of my criticisms that you constantly insist I don't have when you, undermining your own position again by the way, insist that because I am disagreeing with you about some specific thing that I think the game is "perfect"? If not, you should check it out... though right now I can't remember what the topic of the thread was. You and I have been in so many threads the last few days, and I didn't think I'd need to send you back for a reference since I assumed you would read, and actually pay attention to, the post when I first made it.

Edit to add a link to the post I refer to, as it wasn't as hard to find as I expected: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...evels/page12&p=6905873&viewfull=1#post6905873


Also, check your experience history - over the last couple days I've given you XP on a few posts because I do, in fact, agree with you once in a while (my agreement being the reason for the XP).

So please, stop treating me as your windmill to tilt at.

 

[Istbor]

I would say Barbarians want max Con. AC and doubles their HP because of rage.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

Sure, I can see that. I was more thinking about a class that has mechanical advantages or abilities that were more Con focused. Kind of like how the warden of 4e was.

 

[UnadvisedGoose445]

As a personal preference, I don't make any character with anything less than a 14 Con. It's just always a given for me, pretty much.

 

[ccs]

I happen to believe it is broken that WotC releases a pregen character that's supposed to be a frontline combatant that at 10th level gets 53 hit points.

Where's that from?

 

[CTurbo]

It's easy for a Rogue to get a high Con. Rogues only need Dex and Con and maybe a pinch of Wis for Perception.

I started with 18 in Con at level 1 with the last Rogue I played

Rolled stats FTW!!! haha

 

[Chaosmancer]

It's easy for a Rogue to get a high Con. Rogues only need Dex and Con and maybe a pinch of Wis for Perception.

I started with 18 in Con at level 1 with the last Rogue I played

Rolled stats FTW!!! haha

See, as a preference, I tend to find rogues need more Wisdom and Intelligence than Con. Perception and Investigation are most rogues bread and butter skills, so they need to be at the top of that game.

 

[Ancalagon]

It's not. Con 10 needs to be viewed for what it really is: an outlier, something perhaps 10% of adventurers have.

We need to reinforce the notion that you are thin and frail and weak, not at Con 6 or some such nonsense, but at the Con 10 level.

10 con is the average for the general population. But being an adventurer is very physically demanding. Joe average with a con of 10 isn't frail and weak, but average health isn't good enough to be an adventurer. The average person can't keep up.

 

[Greybeard_Ray]

To CTurbo (our OrigPoster);

CON is a tough consideration, because (as you can see from the responses) it has both RP/Story value ("I'm hardy/vigorous..."), and Meta-game value (HP, Disease/Poison/Other Resistance, Concentration). Additionally, how you apply an Ability Score to it also depends on whether or not you use Rolled Attributes or Point-Buy Attributes.

Generally, though, I believe CON should be considered a Secondary Attribute for any character that intends to be a 'front-line' unit (except Rogue; see proviso). CON can be a Tertiary Attribute for any other character, UNLESS it is a caster that expects to maintain Concentration spells constantly.

My proviso for the Rogue is based on the Rogue-premise: "Don't get hit!" If you play the tactical sneak-attack/Disengage routine, you should GENERALLY not be getting hit, and can probably allocate Attribute focus on your skill-base abilities.

Just my opinion, but I've been doing this a while...
Ray

 

[FarBeyondC]

Constitution is usually a stat I tend to ignore, if not dump, as nothing I tend to care about (and no, I don't care about hit points) relates to it. Granted, I try not to have any stat below 10 (as far as point buy is concerned), but if any stat must, then Con is always among the choices.